U.S. Supreme Court to Review Using Cell Phone Data under Fourth Amendment

We’ve previously discussed police using cell phones and data to track people during a criminal investigation and what your Fourth Amendment rights are within that context. Fortunately, courts have historically ruled that obtaining cell phone location data to track someone’s movement constitutes a search under the Fourth Amendment, and law enforcement thus first needs to obtain a warrant to do so.

However, on November 29th, the United States Supreme Court will hear arguments in a case that could have a huge impact on the scope of the Fourth Amendment in the digital age.

The Case

The case—Carpenter v. U.S.—stems from a 2011 criminal investigation, whereby the police and prosecutors relied on cell phone location records as evidence in a conviction. Investigators specifically accessed close to 13,000 separate data points to get this evidence, and did so not only without a warrant, but without probable cause.

In this case (and in thousands of others), the government sought location data of a private individual (Carpenter) pursuant to the Stored Communications Act (SCA) instead of a warrant, claiming that they were seeking a “disclosure,” which does not require a finding of probable cause. The SCA authorizes issuance of this “disclosure” when the government can first show that there are reasonable grounds that records released will be relevant and material to an ongoing criminal investigation.

As a result, the district court ordered Carpenter’s service provider to disclose cell phone location records without first (or ever) making a probable cause finding. The U.S. Supreme Court is now taking up the issue because the United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit is divided as to whether there is a reasonable expectation of privacy in these types of location records, and has had to rely on Supreme Court precedent that is four-decades-old. In its decision, the Court will ultimately determine whether the Fourth Amendment permits the warrantless seizure and search of historical cell phone records which reveal the location and movements of the cell phone user over a number of days.

Marketers & Location Data

Interestingly, the outcome of the case could also have an impact on marketers who want to use geolocating to target specific consumers, or use location data to better gauge consumer needs and wants. And yet, tracking people’s location via mobile devices without their consent or knowledge is arguably both ethically and morally questionable.

Consult a Criminal Defense Lawyer

If you have been arrested based on cell phone data, you need to speak with an experienced criminal defense attorney right away in order to ensure that this information is not used against you as evidence.

At The Baez Law Firm, we have represented many clients whose Fourth Amendment rights were violated by police and prosecutors throughout Florida and Massachusetts. Contact us today for a consultation.

Miami Office

Orlando Office

Email Us

Fields Marked * Are required

DISCLAIMER: Completing and submitting this form or otherwise merely contacting The Baez Law Firm or any individual at the firm will not establish an attorney/client relationship. Our firm cannot represent you until we determine that there would be no conflict of interest and that we are otherwise able to accept representation of your case. Please do not send any information or documents until a formal attorney/client relationship has been established through an interview with an attorney and you have been given authorization in the form of an engagement letter with The Baez Law Firm. Any information or documents sent via this form or otherwise prior to your receipt of an engagement letter will not be treated as confidences, secrets, or protected information of any nature. Submitting information regarding your potential case will not bar The Baez Law Firm from representing or continuing to represent a person or entity whose interest are adverse to your in condition with your case.

DISCLAIMER: This website contains information about The Baez Law Firm that includes testimonial statements from persons who are familiar with the firm's services. The testimonials shown are not necessarily representative of every person's experience with us. Testimonials from every client are not provided. As no two situations or persons are identical, the facts and circumstances of your situation may differ from those for which testimonials are shown. This website also includes information about some of the past results that we have obtained for our clients. Not all results are provided, and the results shown are not necessarily representative of all results obtained by us. No two situation are exactly alike; every person's situation is unique and the outcome for each person depends on the individual facts.

The information on this website is for general information purposes only. Nothing on this site should be taken as legal advice for any individual case or situation. This information is not intended to create, and receipt or viewing does not constitute, an attorney-client relationship.